Kevin Thurlow wrote:Most members attended the latest club AGM. Three of the committee members attending hold more than one post. The non-committee members attending included one who had left the committee after 40 years of holding multiple posts (me), one who had been a match captain and hosted committee meetings for years, one with a demanding job and two young children, one member aged 13 -14, and one older member recovering from illness.
So apathy does not come into it.
Back to reading Les Miserables, already on page 627 - nearly halfway!

Kevin...
`Apathy` is the term that Neil Graham uses to explain the dearth of volunteers for county captains.... he might have a point, but I`m sure that is not targeted at people like yourself, who have given many years good service, doing multiple jobs.
My appeal is to those who may not, for various reasons, have been involved in chess organisation.
I`ve been around the chess scene for a number of years too...actively participating in County events for several counties....and active on various administrative chess bodies.
We need some new faces to join the party...

As for people just `pleasing themselves what they do`.. that's exactly why the NCCU debacle has run for so long.. .. not easy.

I have been actively involved with the Open team in various ways for much of the past 15 years.. Others have also taken an active role, and unfortunately we lost our captain `mid season` a couple of years back..
We`re not talking particularly about some formidable captain, I don't think. No more so than any other county. But a 170+ player perhaps, who could pick the team and make the arrangements doesn't seem beyond the bounds of possibility.
Alternatively, maybe an administrative (non-playing) captain might be the way forward.
I`m sure we have enough good players to put out a 16 board team in the Counties Qualifiers event.... and we have done this on a number of occasions in previous years.
We`ll see whether things materialise over the summer, and what the MCF decide to do..
These issues are by no means confined to GMan.. It would certainly be good if more teams from around the country emerged in the Open sections to compete in the National stages...

Last edited by David Pardoe on Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

David Pardoe wrote:
My club AGM takes place next week.
The MCF AGM takes place on 9th July in Manchester, I believe. Hot off the press... Manchester urgently needs a new Web Master..
And the MCCU AGM takes place on Sunday June 26th, I believe, near Derby.

Sean Hewitt wrote:Seems to me the north Manchester lot should join Lancs in the NCCU and the south Manchester mob play for Cheshire, switching to MCCU.

Problem solved

You may want to help Bill O'Rourke, it certainly seems that Dave P does, but:

The MCF AGM was unanimous i.e. all the clubs, including those in south Manchester, want Greater Manchester to join the NCCU and play competitive county chess against the Northern Counties

MCF Council (all of whose members are elected by the clubs at the MCF AGM) rejected the "offer" to change the county boundaries, so as to pretty much restrict us to picking players from Eccles (and maybe Chorlton)

MCF Council also rejected the "offer" to play in the NCCU under the name Lancashire 2nd

Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

David Pardoe wrote:
My club AGM takes place next week.
The MCF AGM takes place on 9th July in Manchester, I believe. Hot off the press... Manchester urgently needs a new Web Master..
And the MCCU AGM takes place on Sunday June 26th, I believe, near Derby.

I will look forward to David's reports of these meetings!

David isn't an MCF rep to the MCCU, so he won't be attending the latter (particularly as everyone else will be there on Sat 25 June )

I doubt he will be attending the middle one, but I don't know who will be representing Stockport

I'll be really interested in the first one though, as Stockport is 1 of the only clubs in the Manchester League who don't supply anyone currently as an MCF Officer or Council Member (despite having 3 or 4 times as many members as clubs like mine that do supply at least 1 person)

Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

David Pardoe wrote:Sean, who hails from Leicestershire, but currently plays his chess in Manchester, I believe, suggests disbanding GMan...??
Mick has said they need a County Open team captain. Someone like Sean could make an excellent choice.

Don't let the fact that I play county chess for Leicestershire, live in Derbyshire, and play for a Cheshire club in the Stockport (not Manchester) league get in the way, eh.

David Pardoe wrote:Sean, who hails from Leicestershire, but currently plays his chess in Manchester, I believe, suggests disbanding GMan...??
Mick has said they need a County Open team captain. Someone like Sean could make an excellent choice.

Don't let the fact that I play county chess for Leicestershire, live in Derbyshire, and play for a Cheshire club in the Stockport (not Manchester) league get in the way, eh.

Sean..
So you play for a Cheshire cLub...?
And you only play in the Stockport league...?
Given that the club we are talking about is Marple, if I`m not mistaken, why do you not play in there Manchester team?

Incidentally, Marple have been great supporters of our GMan county teams over the years, so I`m sure they would be glad to take you, if you so chose. You also have the choice of Derbs, and possibly Cheshire
Might be worth thinking about if Leicestershire can`t raise a team. But I`m sure they are OK for the MCCU Minor Counties, if that's there choice.
Incidentally, are you planning to go to the MCCU AGM.
I doubt if any Manchester delegates will show up, but you never know.
I was the last GMan county captain to attend an MCCU AGM, since at least 2001, as far as I know. I think I`ve attended 3 in my time as captain, and they were always quite lively discussions, if not well attended at times.
My best wishes to the meeting...

David Pardoe wrote:
My club AGM takes place next week.
The MCF AGM takes place on 9th July in Manchester, I believe. Hot off the press... Manchester urgently needs a new Web Master..
And the MCCU AGM takes place on Sunday June 26th, I believe, near Derby.

I will look forward to David's reports of these meetings!

David isn't an MCF rep to the MCCU, so he won't be attending the latter (particularly as everyone else will be there on Sat 25 June )

I doubt he will be attending the middle one, but I don't know who will be representing Stockport

I'll be really interested in the first one though, as Stockport is 1 of the only clubs in the Manchester League who don't supply anyone currently as an MCF Officer or Council Member (despite having 3 or 4 times as many members as clubs like mine that do supply at least 1 person)

AND..

Sean Hewitt wrote:
Seems to me the north Manchester lot should join Lancs in the NCCU and the south Manchester mob play for Cheshire, switching to MCCU.

Problem solved

MICK wrote...
You may want to help Bill O'Rourke, it certainly seems that Dave P does, but:

The MCF AGM was unanimous i.e. all the clubs, including those in south Manchester, want Greater Manchester to join the NCCU and play competitive county chess against the Northern Counties

MCF Council (all of whose members are elected by the clubs at the MCF AGM) rejected the "offer" to change the county boundaries, so as to pretty much restrict us to picking players from Eccles (and maybe Chorlton)

MCF Council also rejected the "offer" to play in the NCCU under the name Lancashire 2nd

He says the MCF AGM was unanimous in wanting GMan to join the NCCU..?
I bet Bill O`Rourke is similarly opinionated in thinking he has had the backing of the whole of Lancs and the NCCU in keeping GMan out of the NCCU for the past 40 odd years, and he certainly didn`t want GMan to play any competitive Counties chess, certainly not in the counties competitions.. In fact, he and a small group of other extreme elements were hell bent on driving GMan off the chess map, it would appear.
We only survived due to the far sighted good will of the MCCU in allowing us to join them all those years ago..
Whilst Mick has been running his talk shops in this crazy episode, I was actually at the pit face, actively taking on our county captaincies that no-body else would do, and ensuring, in spite of all the challenges, that we actually did play county chess, and had some very good matches in the MCCU competitions in the process... both our Open team, and our U160 team, that is..
I was greatly helped by others in this, from clubs across our GMan `county`.

As to the MCF AGMs `unanimous` decisions... well, Bill O`Rourke demonstrates just how easy it is to take over and run things to `self interest` agendas. And no doubt, he would also claim that he followed procedures. Or did he simply bend the rules to suit himself.... so its very easy when your target group is crippled with apathy, and most couldn`t really care less about the agendas being played out.

And have the GMan clubs who attended these AGMs really been given the full facts about joining the NCCU, or just a `selective story` to fit certain agendas..
I certainly think they should consider matters very carefully before stepping into the NCCU `counties exclusion zone`, where almost non of the counties there play any meaningful county chess.
In fact 90% of it consists of Lancs & Yorks slogging it out, and both `winning`, whilst the rest are side-lined as muted spectators.

The deal on offer to GMan still allows Lancs to camp in GMan territory, and cherry pick our players...and clubs? Its worse than the deal struck with Merseyside, I believe, and even they have decided to stay on the side-lines, and not play any NCCU county chess competitions. .
And after 40 years of apathy, one Lancs club (based in Manchester), has finally decided to put in a challenge to this nonsense...and lashed together an `offer` to get GMan back into the NCCU, on terms that are still second rate, many will feel..

GMan might buy this...but I hope not.
The only appeal it has is some easy short trips to play Lancs and Yorks.. in cut down 12 board matches??
Where as, in the MCCU the county matches are the full 16 board events
But the North Manchester clubs who would prefer to travel to `local` NCCU venues, don`t show any greater commitment when we play in those areas than they do otherwise, in the MCCU.
In our latest trip to play Yorks U160, less than a third of our team players were from North Manchester clubs...?
And also... that`s not what these counties events are about..( a few short trips to Lancs and Yorks....??), The counties competitions are about much more than that..
In the National stages, GMan would be faced with the reality of trips much further afield...to places like Leicester, south Birmingham, and Worcester.
How would they cope, if all they really only want is a few short trips to Heywood or Halifax, near to the Lancs/ GMan borders.

So the MCCU still offers by far the best deal for Manchester, in my view... for its county chess.
In the MCCU group, no less than 8 counties actually competed in the counties events and progressed to the National Finals stages this year. .. i.e., its much better organised, and is a fully inclusive set of competitions. And GMans travel issues are pretty reasonable by many county standards.. Not perfect, I accept, but certainly non of the hassle we`ve faced with the NCCU & Lancs for the past 40 odd years.

So, my message to GMan is to think very carefully about what you let yourself in for.
I`ve made my comments about what might be done to improve things in the NCCU, as have others... we`ll see what happens.
Meanwhile I do believe GMan should sit tight at the present time, and continue to remain with the MCCU....certainly for the county U160 team.

As for Bill O`Rourke, I have words of praise. It should be noted that he has done great deeds for northern chess over many years..
He may have gone rather astray with his mission to keep GMan under the cosh, but some of his aims might indeed have been well intentioned from a Lancs perspective.
He wanted a mighty Lancs army to take on the `South` in the counties National competitions...and he didn`t want this watering down by the presence of an `extra` GMan army. Glory for Lancs and the North was his mission, I believe. Maybe Bill could speak to us..?

My belief is that there is room for three or more great Northern armies, to challenge `the south` domination. If my suggestion of creating 5 chess regions in the north, and running regional based events, rather than county based events could be developed, we might even have 5 mighty armies to head south with. A truly epic struggle for supremacy might then be possible, with some tremendous county/regional battles in prospect.. If the MCCU top guns could join the fray, we could send down a strong Midlands army too!!
Warks.. Staffs, Notts... stir yourselves... and Leicestershire too. We don't want Sean getting bored and having to `switch` to Northern battalions do we..

As for the Lancs/GMan/NCCU debacle...lets not lose sight of the fact that we are actually good neighbours who share a great deal of common interest.
We`re not talking here about some great religious divide.. we have simply divided up our region, and added some new labels. These are simply lines in the sand.....purely for administrative purposes.
Any player playing for GMan can proudly proclaim his Lancs heritage if he/she so wishes, and even sing `Lancashire forever` at our matches. So, being part of GMan doesn`t make you a Lancs traitor, as some would have you think. These are simply labels. no more ..no less.
And finally, being part of the MCCU doesn't preclude GMan from playing Lancs and Yorks.. it just means those encounters would take place at the National stages.

And Mick.. you mentioned Stockport chess club. They do a very considerable amount of good work for local chess, in both Manchester & Stockport.

And here`s something your father might very much approve of....
How about the MCF bringing back adjournments or adjudications. Allow a first playing session of say 60 moves, which should ensure that 99% of games finish in the first session. This might then reduce the number of open ended blitz shootout league games, where games can be decided on pot luck, ...and whose got the `clock advantage`. Very unsatisfactory to lose on time with a winning or drawn position, just because your opponent has clock advantage and can literally refuse a draw request and force you off the clock....
Some players apparently do like the adrenalin buzz they get from these situations, which can certainly set the heart racing.

Talking of which, how many of the so called `MCF council members` actually show up for meetings on any kind of regular basis ..??
And why have no minutes of these meetings been published for months....on the MCF website? last one to appear was 25th Jan I believe...?

In all seriousness, with Yorkshire winning the Open twice in a row, talk of challenging 'southern' supremacy should be focused more on getting teams out. And taking part is literally more important than who wins.

I don't think Yorkshire winning the county competition cheers Lancastrians up much

As for Lancs vs GM, it is (contrary to the above) very like a bad sort of religious divide!

Otherwise sane and rational people who get along in a number of ways but have an item of faith - ie Manchester not being a valid county for chess purposes - that they absolutely will not even consider bending from